Paul
Goble
Staunton, November 27 – Ethnic
Russians have a positive attitude toward Tatars and Bashkirs whom they view as
being among “their own,” Emil Pain says, an indication that “in Russia,
negative stereotypes still are formed mainly
along ethnic rather than religious lines and are directed not so much at those
of different faiths but at those of different ethnicities.
In a discussion of the relationship
between social distance, negative imagery, and xenophobia, the Moscow
specialist on ethnicity adds that polls over the last two decades have shown “a
softening of ethnic negativism toward all the peoples of Russia” (mbk-news.appspot.com/sences/chuzhoj-v-politike-svoj-v-bytu/).
The ethnic stereotypes people have
about themselves and others are remarkably stable over time as opposed to political
judgments as the result of changing circumstances, Pain continues. And those stereotypes are stable at the interpersonal
level even in the fact of massive propaganda efforts to change them.
The Higher School of Economics
professor says that it is a mistake to call all manifestations of ethnic negativism
“xenophobia.” Not all the reasons for
negative views are irrational as xenophobic attitudes tend to be. Instead, in
many cases, they reflect real experiences like social and economic competition
or threats.
Moreover, Pain insists, “by calling all
negativism xenophobia, we deprive ourselves of the opportunity to distinguish
fresh and as a rule unstable stereotypes from historically deep prejudices, the
rational basis for the appearance of which have already been forgotten but
where the hatred they have given rise to remains.
In the Russian Federation, the peak
of ethnic negativism occurred in 2013. Mass social dissatisfaction in much stimulated
by the comparatively broad support of protest actions in Moscow in 2012 found
or helped to find another niche, negativism against practically all ethnic ‘alien’
groups.”
But “after the annexation of Crimea
in 2014, the rise of negative attitudes was replaced by an unprecedented decline,”
with negative ratings falling to the lowest level over at least the last 30
years. “Experts even began to speak about
the sunset of xenophobia in Russia,” Pain notes.
He adds that in his view, this
period will be a subject of research by historians, psychologists, sociologists
and political scientist because up to ow it remains unclear which factors called
forth such a short-term but strong decline in ethnic negativism.” In 2018, this decline was reversed and this
year it has returned to the level of 2010-1012.
“After the annexation of Crimea,
something inexplicable occurred in the mass consciousness of Russians: One must
not say that a mass love for all ethnic groups descended on them but beyond question
the sense of separateness relative to the majority of ethnic groups radically
fell.”
Since the 1990s, the specialist
continues, “images of the Chechens and Roma were among the leaders in terms of
negativism. In the first decade of this century, the image of the Chinese
joined them. By 2015, stereotypes about the Chinese and Chechens fell from this
ranking, replaced by images of the Americans and Ukrainians.”
Indeed, the Americans and the Ukrainians
were “the only groups in relation to which negative assessments rose in the
post-Crimean period,” Pain points out. In both cases, however, these
assessments were driven by political developments and did not affect Russians’
deeper and longer-standing views.
And that contains an important
lesson, Pain concludes. Russians (and others) may change their political
assessment of other peoples in response to developments or propaganda; but they
seldom change their assessment of members of other groups at the inter-personal
level – or if they do, it is for a very short period of time and soon comes
back to where it was before.
In many cases, he adds, “political and inter-personal
assessments do not correspond, and politics (including propaganda0 has little
impact on preferences in day-to-day relationships.”
No comments:
Post a Comment